Speaker 1: Like, I'm sure you must have heard about the Jewish
Speaker 1: couple that got murdered by the Palestinian supporter.
Speaker 2: What is wrong with people?
Speaker 1: I mean, honestly, let's see, I don't like the government
Speaker 1: of your ancestors and your people, so therefore.
Speaker 2: I will kill you. It's just evil, That's correct.
Speaker 3: And I think if if we step back from everything,
Speaker 3: you know, the minutia, like I want to talk about
Speaker 3: the Medicaid provisions, because there's so much hyperbole out there
Speaker 3: about the Medicaid provisions in this bill.
Speaker 2: But when you.
Speaker 3: Step away from that and you look at kind of
Speaker 3: the big stuff going on in the world, it really
Speaker 3: is a battle of good versus evil. And I suppose,
Speaker 3: if I wanted to, I could take that come man
Speaker 3: about good versus evil and drill it down to almost everything,
Speaker 3: including you know, maybe even this Medicaid stuff I'm getting
Speaker 3: ready to talk about. To give you an idea of
Speaker 3: where I'm going, because today is is it's not what
Speaker 3: I expected at all. I'm just walking around with my
Speaker 3: laptop trying to figure out everything that's going on in
Speaker 3: this legislation.
Speaker 2: The one thing that.
Speaker 3: And I don't think there's anything wrong, because there are
Speaker 3: things in this bill that piss me off. And I
Speaker 3: know because I'm reading the text line. There are things
Speaker 3: in this bill to piss you off. There are also
Speaker 3: some things in this bill that I think are good,
Speaker 3: and I and I would say, it's about damn time
Speaker 3: we've done some of these things. For example, one of
Speaker 3: the things that irritates me about the bill is that
Speaker 3: it add to the deficit, which so we don't get
Speaker 3: an engineering upset, that it adds to the budget deficit annually,
Speaker 3: which then means we have to borrow to cover that deficit,
Speaker 3: which then that borrowed money gets added to the national debt,
Speaker 3: and that drives me crazy. But if if, if Dragon
Speaker 3: and I who have And I'm not nearly as good
Speaker 3: as what Dragon's done, But I'm as proud of the
Speaker 3: weight that I've lost as Dragon is of the weight
Speaker 3: that he's lost. But relatively speaking, he has more to
Speaker 3: be proud of because he started at a lot worse spot,
Speaker 3: relatively speaking than I did.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's something to be proud of, lightly sarcastic, because yeah,
Speaker 2: I shouldn't have been up to over three hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty pounds, right, So you you have.
Speaker 3: In terms of more to be proud of you've had.
Speaker 3: You've lost more weight proportionally than I have, and so
Speaker 3: you should be.
Speaker 2: More proud, could be prouder than I am.
Speaker 3: But we both still lost weight.
Speaker 2: Correct. We both laugh because now I don't do this.
Speaker 3: I don't have a freezer full of frozen crumbled cookie.
Speaker 3: I don't have a freezer that has one frozen crumble
Speaker 3: cookie in it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, back there, you're.
Speaker 3: Choking on anything but like a frozen crumbled cookie. So
Speaker 3: relatively again, relatively speaking, he and I will h You know, well,
Speaker 3: I don't Dragon doesn't weigh every day. I tend to
Speaker 3: weigh every day because I I'm just I don't know.
Speaker 3: It's just a habit now, and so if if I
Speaker 3: bump up a couple of pounds, I know exactly what
Speaker 3: I've done. But in the grand scheme of things, unless
Speaker 3: I just continually gain weight, and so I go from
Speaker 3: my current weight and suddenly I'm back to where I
Speaker 3: was ten years ago, then I failed.
Speaker 2: Well, I think in many ways.
Speaker 3: Adding a few more billions of dollars or actually now
Speaker 3: trillions of dollars to the national of debt in the
Speaker 3: grand scheme of things for a country that's already left.
Speaker 3: Maybe it's just going to speed up the point where
Speaker 3: the cadaver finally just gives up the spirit and we
Speaker 3: start all over again. The point being that what I
Speaker 3: want to do in the next hour is kind of
Speaker 3: put it in a little bit of perspective, because there
Speaker 3: are things to be irritated about, and there's some things
Speaker 3: that we recognize that are good. So we take the
Speaker 3: good with the bad, take the win, and we move
Speaker 3: on to try to fix the other stuff. I'm still irritated,
Speaker 3: don't get me wrong. I'm still irritated. And some of
Speaker 3: the things that irritate me now are the claims like
Speaker 3: Clara McCaskill about millions of people are gonna lose Medicaid coverage.
Speaker 3: What if I told you that might be true, but
Speaker 3: I don't give you any context to it. I just
Speaker 3: tell you that, yeah, you know what, there are millions
Speaker 3: of people might lose Medicaid coverage. Well, what if I
Speaker 3: told you that the bill does indeed introduce significant Medicaid
Speaker 3: cuts that could result in millions losing coverage over time.
Speaker 3: But that's because the bill also includes Medicaid reforms that
Speaker 3: are going to result in stricter eligibility and more accountability
Speaker 3: for those who are on Medicaid to make certain that
Speaker 3: they continue to meet the requirements to be on Medicaid.
Speaker 3: The Congressional Budget Office, in the notes and the bill
Speaker 3: estimates that the changes to Medicaid could lead up to
Speaker 3: Now that this is the CBO, so take it with
Speaker 3: a grain of salt, but they estimate that the changes
Speaker 3: can lead up to eight point six million people losing
Speaker 3: health coverage over a decade. All right, so eight million
Speaker 3: over ten years, and it's primarily for Medicaid. Now, there's
Speaker 3: also losses that nobody seems to want to talk about
Speaker 3: that come from some of the reforms to the Affordable
Speaker 3: Care Act Obamacare. So here are some of the specifics.
Speaker 3: What are the Medicaid cuts in the big the one
Speaker 3: Big Beautiful Bill and the OBBB. We'll call it the OBBB.
Speaker 3: So what are the requirements in the OBB It tries
Speaker 3: to save about to save eight hundred and eighty billion
Speaker 3: dollars over ten years, primarily through proposals that came out
Speaker 3: of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. They are cuts
Speaker 3: and reforms. Both these are what I consider to be
Speaker 3: what I found so far to be I think the
Speaker 3: key components one there's a work requirement. Able body adults
Speaker 3: between the ages of nineteen and sixty four who have
Speaker 3: no dependence must work, volunteer, or be enrolled in some
Speaker 3: accredited institution of education for at least eighty hours per
Speaker 3: month twenty hours per week in order to qualify for Medicaid. Now,
Speaker 3: that requirement was originally set to begin in twenty twenty nine.
Speaker 3: If that were the case, I would be arguing, right now,
Speaker 3: that's absurd. Well, they accelerated it to next year, primarily
Speaker 3: because of Chip Roy from Texas, who wanted even more cuts.
Speaker 3: But he wanted to start right now. The others wanted
Speaker 3: to wait till twenty twenty nine. Now, why why do
Speaker 3: I have to ask? Do I have to answer the
Speaker 3: question for you? Why would they wait until twenty twenty
Speaker 3: nine to implement a work requirement for medicaid? What's happening
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty eight Dragon.
Speaker 2: The presidential election? Oh yeah, yeah, so we have to
Speaker 2: wait ti life for that. So they did, you know?
Speaker 3: So, For as much as I've criticized them, I will
Speaker 3: at least give them kudos for accelerating that work requirement
Speaker 3: to twenty twenty six. Campaign on it, be proud of it,
Speaker 3: say to the millions of people that voted for Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: that yes, we decided that if your able body between
Speaker 3: the ages of nineteen and sixty four, you got to work,
Speaker 3: you got to be actively engaged in volunteer programs, or
Speaker 3: you've got to be enrolled in an accredited program of
Speaker 3: education for twenty hours a week to qualify for Medicaid. Now,
Speaker 3: the CBO estimates that that requirement could exclude one point
Speaker 3: five million people from Medicaid. And of the one point
Speaker 3: five million, there would be about a little over half
Speaker 3: a million, about six hundred thousand that might become actually uninsured. Okay,
Speaker 3: that doesn't seem all that bad to me, because why
Speaker 3: would you become Why would you get excluded? Well, maybe
Speaker 3: you're out of the date range. Maybe there's some reas
Speaker 3: and that you don't want to work or volunteer, or
Speaker 3: you don't want to go back to school, or you
Speaker 3: don't want to stay in school or whatever. Okay, whether
Speaker 3: you've made that choice, and if that means you get
Speaker 3: kicked off, well then sucks to be you. But that's
Speaker 3: those are the choices that you made. That's based on
Speaker 3: the CBO estimate. Is I shouldn't say based, but they
Speaker 3: cite a study from George's Medicaid work requirement program that
Speaker 3: showed that a lot of the eligible individuals failed to
Speaker 3: meet those requirements because of the administrative burden, not because
Speaker 3: they aren't working, but because it was too much to
Speaker 3: try to do all the paperwork. In that study, they
Speaker 3: found that ninety two percent of Medicaid recipients were either working,
Speaker 3: disabled caregivers, or that they were in school, meaning those
Speaker 3: requirements might disproportionately affect those that are already compliant with
Speaker 3: a work requirement, but they're just simply unable to navigate
Speaker 3: the paperwork. That absolutely believable. Hell's bills, Dragon, going to
Speaker 3: tell you, I find the paperwork in this in this
Speaker 3: building to be absurd. I'm trying to get the television
Speaker 3: fixed in I haven't been down there, Dragon, because I
Speaker 3: know you haven't been down there. I've been down So
Speaker 3: I finally talked to one of the engineers and they
Speaker 3: walked me through the process. And the drop down menus
Speaker 3: are absurd. But I finally got a request in. We'll
Speaker 3: see what happens. Now. How could it lead to a
Speaker 3: coverage loss a work requirement? Well, again, it's the administrative
Speaker 3: barriers like proving compliance on a monthly basis, Well, that
Speaker 3: could cost someone who's actually eligible to lose their coverage.
Speaker 3: And then you have people that live in a rural area.
Speaker 3: If you live in Campo, Colorado, Mike Is, there's not
Speaker 3: a lot of job opportunities. There's no educational opportunities that
Speaker 3: I know. I don't even think there's a public school
Speaker 3: in Campo itself. And insofar as a volunteer opportunity, I
Speaker 3: don't know, volunteer to watch how many cattle trucks drive
Speaker 3: through town? Do it for the county?
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I'm just saying that there are probably areas where it's
Speaker 3: just you know, some people will just be kicked off.
Speaker 3: But let's go back to the administrative requirements. That's the bureaucracy,
Speaker 3: that's the deep state. Well, why doesn't Congress then step
Speaker 3: up and require the deep state, the Medicaid administrators to
Speaker 3: streamline the paperwork. Why not do that? There's also a
Speaker 3: requirement for scharricter eligibility verification. Kind of gets back to
Speaker 3: the administrative problem. Because this resolution, this bill House Resolution
Speaker 3: one is what's.
Speaker 2: Called the OBBB.
Speaker 3: It requires Medicaid recipients to verify their eligibility twice a
Speaker 3: year instead of once a year. Oh oh, what a burden.
Speaker 3: That's awful. Of course, I'm being facetious. If you're taking
Speaker 3: opm other people's money, including my great great great grandchildren
Speaker 3: who have yet to be born, if I'm going to
Speaker 3: have any because we got that much debt piled on,
Speaker 3: then the least you can do is twice a year
Speaker 3: prove that you're eligible to take other people's money. It
Speaker 3: also mandates that there be a home address verification, and
Speaker 3: if your home exceeds a value over a million dollars,
Speaker 3: then year excluded. Now, considering what's going on in the
Speaker 3: real estate market, that might be questionable because there are
Speaker 3: probably some seniors or some medicaid recipients that are you know,
Speaker 3: of course whom I'd give them advice. But you might
Speaker 3: want to call Frank Durant and get that house sold
Speaker 3: and get that equity out of there, quit paying those
Speaker 3: stupid property taxes and gont go downsize if you could.
Speaker 3: But it would exclude an applicant if you have an
Speaker 3: asset a home that's valued over a million dollars on
Speaker 3: the service. That seems pretty reasonable to me because unless
Speaker 3: you've got a million dollar mortgage on that million dollar home.
Speaker 3: Then you know, if you got a million dollar mortgage
Speaker 3: on the home and you are servicing a million dollar mortgage,
Speaker 3: and even if it was in prior rates, that means
Speaker 3: you've got some sort of cash flow somewhere, and maybe
Speaker 3: you shouldn't be a medicaid. This is the harsh reality
Speaker 3: of dealing with entitlements, dealing with when you're using your
Speaker 3: tax dollars, my tax dollars. When you're when you're expropriately
Speaker 3: expropriating those monies out of my paycheck so that you
Speaker 3: can go give it to somebody else, then yeah, I
Speaker 3: want to make sure that whoever you're giving I career,
Speaker 3: you not to give it to anybody else.
Speaker 2: I'd perfect prefer.
Speaker 3: To keep it myself, selfish mastard that I am. But
Speaker 3: if we're going to have a government social safety net
Speaker 3: as opposed to a private or volunteer social safety net,
Speaker 3: then yeah, I want I want some eligibility requirements to
Speaker 3: be met. And you know what's bizarre about me making
Speaker 3: that statement. Most volunteer organizations also have eligibility requirements. You
Speaker 3: want to go get a uh, you know, help from
Speaker 3: some organization. You want to get free therapy, you want
Speaker 3: to get free whatever it is. Okay, Well prove to
Speaker 3: us that you're you meet our requirements to get it
Speaker 3: for free. Well, how could that lead to a coverage loss? Well,
Speaker 3: if you happen to be a low, low income individual,
Speaker 3: maybe you're a senior citizen, or maybe you're in particularly
Speaker 3: might maybe you have disabilities, and so you struggle to
Speaker 3: provide documentation that could lead to disenrollment. The home value restriction,
Speaker 3: which obviously is trying to target wealthier applicants, may affect
Speaker 3: you know, edge cases, you know, cases on the margin
Speaker 3: in high cost housing markets. If if you live in
Speaker 3: a well, I was gonna say a rent controls apartment,
Speaker 3: I'm most sure this would apply to an apartment. But
Speaker 3: if you live in a high rent area and you've
Speaker 3: just lived there all your life, high value area, and
Speaker 3: you bought your home for you know, seventy five thousand
Speaker 3: dollars and now it's worth more than a million dollars,
Speaker 3: but that you have no other income, and maybe you
Speaker 3: can sell right now because there's nothing that you could
Speaker 3: I mean, you get your million dollars out of your home. Oh,
Speaker 3: they're gonna hit you with capital gains tax on something
Speaker 3: over what over half a million or something. Maybe it's
Speaker 3: more than that for couples. I don't know, whatever it is.
Speaker 3: So you're not going to get a million dollars out
Speaker 3: of it, so you could end up being kicked off.
Speaker 2: Then there's another.
Speaker 3: Part, another reason why Democrats are screaming about people being
Speaker 3: losing their health fit because there's going to be reduced
Speaker 3: federal funding and there's going to be an increase in
Speaker 3: cost shore. I'll explain what.
Speaker 2: That means next.
Speaker 1: You usually do very well at thinking outside the box,
Speaker 1: but I think you're missing the point here. One of
Speaker 1: the big concerns a lot of the Democrats have been
Speaker 1: banking that is there is not enough people for the workforce.
Speaker 1: Doing this to affect medicaid will get a lot of
Speaker 1: people to get off their duff and even volunteer at
Speaker 1: like ranches or helping at the produce production places.
Speaker 3: By with all due respect, do you really think someone
Speaker 3: who's been milking medicaid medicaid for years is going to
Speaker 3: go work in a produce plant or work on a ranch.
Speaker 3: You ever worked on a ranch? You ever bailed hay,
Speaker 3: you ever drilled the pickup truck? Out of the back
Speaker 3: forty dump all the hay out to feed the cattle
Speaker 3: and make sure the water tank was full. That's work,
Speaker 3: that's real work. I don't think they'll volunteer to do that.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure they would work to get paid to
Speaker 3: do that either, but maybe they will. Maybe you're right,
Speaker 3: maybe they will. I think what will happen is if
Speaker 3: if people are let's set of, let's set aside for
Speaker 3: a moment, those who are incapable of dealing with the paperwork, elderly,
Speaker 3: you know, maybe low IQ, what whatever the situation circumstances
Speaker 3: might be. Uh, those people probably should have some sort
Speaker 3: of assistance, which I'm sure there'll be volunteer organizations. There
Speaker 3: will probably be even divisions. But you know, it'd be
Speaker 3: like going to a Social Security office and telling them, hey,
Speaker 3: you know, I've reached the age where I need to
Speaker 3: apply I'm not sure how to do it or whatever,
Speaker 3: and I don't to do it online or I don't
Speaker 3: have a computer or whatever it is, and they'll walk
Speaker 3: you through and do it for you. But regardless of
Speaker 3: any of that, just requiring some sort of work, volunteer
Speaker 3: or being getting an education, I think it is a
Speaker 3: minimal requirement.
Speaker 2: Excuse me, So what.
Speaker 3: There is reduced federal funding and they have increased the
Speaker 3: cost sharing for the states. Now you know that Medicaid
Speaker 3: is actually administered by the states, and a lot of states,
Speaker 3: excuse me, Colorado, California, I'm looking at you actually allow
Speaker 3: illegal aliens on the program. So the OBBB that may
Speaker 3: have been too many b's, I don't know. The OBBB
Speaker 3: actually reduces what's called the federal medical assistance percentage. For
Speaker 3: states that expanded Medicaid using Obamacare, they'll cut the federal
Speaker 3: contributions by ten percent if your state covers illegal aliens.
Speaker 3: So California, New York, Colorado, all of these blue states
Speaker 3: that are doing it, you're going to have to make
Speaker 3: up that difference, or you're going to figure out a
Speaker 3: way to reverse your dumbass policy of American taxpayers subsidizing
Speaker 3: the healthcare of people who are in this country illegally
Speaker 3: and who aren't working, or are not getting an education
Speaker 3: or what. Well, frankly, just the fact they're here illegally.
Speaker 3: In my opinion, they should not be entitled to any
Speaker 3: of our benefits other than the protections they're due. That
Speaker 3: anybody would do that would be entitled to under our constitution.
Speaker 3: Whether you're here as a visitor on a tourist visa,
Speaker 3: or you're from a country that doesn't require a truist visa,
Speaker 3: you're here on a business trip, or whatever, you're still
Speaker 3: subject to the same criminal laws, due process, et cetera.
Speaker 3: By got all of that all right, This bill also
Speaker 3: introduces copays up to thirty five dollars per visit. It
Speaker 3: does exclude emergency, prenatal, pediatric, or primary care for recipients
Speaker 3: earning above one hundred percent of the federal poverty level,
Speaker 3: which I think is around thirty two thousand dollars for
Speaker 3: a family of four. And then it freezes state provided
Speaker 3: state provider taxes which fund Medicaid, which will potentially reduce
Speaker 3: state budgets. So what's the impact. Go back to the CBO.
Speaker 3: They say those funding changes could save could save five
Speaker 3: hundred and sixty one billion dollars over the next decade.
Speaker 3: Then you have reduced federal support, which will force states
Speaker 3: to tighten eligibility. They'll have to probably cut some benefits.
Speaker 3: They'll certainly have to stop the stupid Obamacare expansions. And
Speaker 3: the only place I can find a citation for the
Speaker 3: consequences of that is from the Urban Institute, a very
Speaker 3: left leaning organization. Will They project that cutting the federal
Speaker 3: medical assistance percentage could lead to about fifteen million losing
Speaker 3: coverage if states abandon the expansions.
Speaker 2: States may not.
Speaker 3: So once and if the states don't, and you're like
Speaker 3: Colorado and you can't deficit spend, they'll either try to
Speaker 3: raid tabor or they'll try to impose a increase on us.
Speaker 3: It'll all be done in the name of how can
Speaker 3: you be such a cold hearted human being that you
Speaker 3: don't want to support someone on medicaid who came to
Speaker 3: the country illegally. Well, I'll raise my hand. You can
Speaker 3: call me cold hearted, but I think if you came
Speaker 3: to the country illegally, you need to go back home.
Speaker 3: Or if you're going to stay here until we until
Speaker 3: we send you back home, we shouldn't be paying you
Speaker 3: to be here. Why why should we pay you when
Speaker 3: you broke the law and you came here and now
Speaker 3: you want us to take care of you. No, Na,
Speaker 3: and it's not going to happen. So how could it
Speaker 3: lead to coverage loss? The states that faced the budget
Speaker 3: shortfalls would probably try to reduce Medicaid roles or benefits,
Speaker 3: particularly in those so called expansion states where they've been
Speaker 3: expanding it and providing it to more and more people
Speaker 3: all the time, and then the co pays themselves might
Speaker 3: lead to some lapse coverage for those who can't afford
Speaker 3: the out of pocket expense.
Speaker 2: I would again say, this.
Speaker 3: Is where because we've advocated our compassion to the government
Speaker 3: that if if you wanted to start a nonprofit that
Speaker 3: would help people navigate, you could probably have a You
Speaker 3: could probably make a go of that. Or I would
Speaker 3: even say if you wanted to start a nonprofit where
Speaker 3: you raise money to help people that can't afford to
Speaker 3: pay for the co pays, you could probably do that.
Speaker 3: There are enough compassionate people in this country. We're the
Speaker 3: most giving country in the world, and people are always
Speaker 3: willing to give. I mean, he's bills, look at the
Speaker 3: Look at the probably billions of dollars that we give
Speaker 3: to save animals in this country. So if you wanted
Speaker 3: to save someone who's you know, elderly and can't get
Speaker 3: out of their home and doesn't even know what a computer,
Speaker 3: they may know what a computer is, but they don't
Speaker 3: have one, but know how to operate one they went
Speaker 3: to the library. I'm sorry to the library and try
Speaker 3: to operate the computer that has had somebody that help
Speaker 3: them do it. That that might be a nonprofit that
Speaker 3: would work. But then there's there are specific and here's
Speaker 3: where you'll probably some people's heads will explode. There are
Speaker 3: some restrictions for Medicaid eligibility on specific populations, specific groups
Speaker 3: of people. It prohibits Medicaid funds funds from going to
Speaker 3: organizations like Planned Parenthood YEP. It also explicitly excludes undocked
Speaker 3: illegal aliens from Medicaid, and there are penalties for states
Speaker 3: that allow the coverage. So defunding Planned Parenthood could limit
Speaker 3: access to non abortion services, which is a very small
Speaker 3: port for Medicaid recipients million areas with few alternative providers.
Speaker 3: I mean, I'm just trying to be objective here. Excluding
Speaker 3: an illegal alien. Well, that absolutely aligns with GOP goals
Speaker 3: to limit benefits to citizens. But of course it's going
Speaker 3: to affect states that have all those stupid policies that say, hey,
Speaker 3: we don't care whether you we don't check, just show
Speaker 3: up and we'll just pay for you. And states have
Speaker 3: that attitude because it's o PM other people's money. The
Speaker 3: CBO's estimate of eight point six million losing coverage is
Speaker 3: seven point six to ten point three million from Medicaid specifically,
Speaker 3: is driven by all of these provisions that I just
Speaker 3: described to you. Now, the Center for American Progress, which
Speaker 3: is one of the most progressive organizations in the country,
Speaker 3: they're out there citing that thirteen million people are going
Speaker 3: to lose coverage by by twenty thirty four, including the
Speaker 3: eight point six million, so actually twenty one million. Well,
Speaker 3: I don't believe those numbers whatsoever because they have a
Speaker 3: vested interest because what does the Center for American Progress want.
Speaker 3: They want socialized medicine. They win a single payer as
Speaker 3: system in this country. So when you think about from
Speaker 3: the Republican perspective, these reforms actually strengthen and sustain medicaid
Speaker 3: because it roots out all the ways fraud and abuse.
Speaker 3: It actually ensures that the benefits are intended to go
Speaker 3: to those that are actually in need, mothers, children that disabled.
Speaker 3: The work requirement and the verification targets make certain that
Speaker 3: only those who meet the requirements are going to get
Speaker 3: oh PM. So why why is it out there in screen? Well,
Speaker 3: because you're being gasolined millions. The people are gonna lose
Speaker 3: their health care, well not necessarily, so don't believe everything
Speaker 3: that you hear.
Speaker 2: Hey, Michael, I kind of got a question. I was
Speaker 2: wondering about something.
Speaker 3: Out of everybody that's gotten Medicaid, that are eligible for Medicaid,
Speaker 3: how many actually.
Speaker 2: Use Medicaid And is it costing us to have them
Speaker 2: on the rolls if they're not using Medicaid. I don't
Speaker 2: know just what I was thinking. I never thought about that. Why.
Speaker 3: I suppose you could go and roll in Medicaid because
Speaker 3: you've met the qualifications and then you never have an
Speaker 3: annual exam or you never get sick, you never need
Speaker 3: a surgery, or I suppose that's possible. I don't know
Speaker 3: how you find that number out, but that does. Speaking
Speaker 3: of numbers, to me, tabs open them number Goober, number
Speaker 3: forty three, twenty one. I'm a retired occupational therapist. In
Speaker 3: twenty twenty one, when I was still licensed, I received
Speaker 3: a letter from Dora. They were looking for Health First Colorado,
Speaker 3: that's the Medicaid providers. They were looking for those providers
Speaker 3: and what mean to consider becoming one. This statement in
Speaker 3: the letter took my breath away. Quote, one in four
Speaker 3: Colorados are Health First Colorado members, and more providers are
Speaker 3: needed to help treat the influx of new Health First
Speaker 3: Colorado members. They write, Now this was during COVID, but
Speaker 3: still it is a staggering number. One quarter of the
Speaker 3: state population on Medicaid. Well, it wasn't that I didn't
Speaker 3: trust you, but I didn't trust you, So I ask,
Speaker 3: what's the percentage of the Colorado population is on Medicaid.
Speaker 3: What's the raw number as of twenty twenty three, Approximately
Speaker 3: thirty percent, So it's way above Now you're twenty five
Speaker 3: percent from twenty twenty one. Yeah, we've gone from your
Speaker 3: twenty five percent and now thirty percent. Approximately thirty percent
Speaker 3: of Colorado's population was enrolled in Medicaid Health First Colorado.
Speaker 3: With Colorad's population estimated around five point eight million people,
Speaker 3: that translates to roughly one point seven four million people
Speaker 3: in this state on Medicaid. Now, those numbers might fluctuate
Speaker 3: because we started doing this process back in twenty twenty
Speaker 3: three called unwinding, which led to some disenrollments, people dropping
Speaker 3: off the Medicaid system. But there's more recent data from
Speaker 3: October of last year that indicates we've gone from one
Speaker 3: point seven four million down to one point one eighty
Speaker 3: five million, one million, eighty five eleven Coloradens currently covered
Speaker 3: by Medicaid. But again that is a post unwinding drop
Speaker 3: and probably doesn't capture the full population percentage. See this
Speaker 3: is the progressives objective. Start pushing people off you know,
Speaker 3: private healthcare and get them onto government run healthcare. Now
Speaker 3: we know it doesn't work. We we we've got the proof,
Speaker 3: We've got the receipts. All you have to do is
Speaker 3: look at the national health system, which is literally breaking
Speaker 3: the bank in the United Kingdom and leading to really
Speaker 3: bad health outcomes. Socialized medicine has never worked, and socialized
Speaker 3: medicine is just one of the steps toward Marxism and communism.
Speaker 3: You control a person's health, you control everything. And when
Speaker 3: the government controls healthcare, I mean to go to make
Speaker 3: a giant leap here, but it's not that far of
Speaker 3: a leap. You end up with vans like you have
Speaker 3: in China that oh guys, we need.
Speaker 2: Can you get us? Yeah, we need a kidney. Can
Speaker 2: you find us a kidney? Sure? Does it need to match?
Speaker 3: Who cares? Just go find one? Okay, guys, get in
Speaker 3: the van.
Speaker 2: Let's go.
Speaker 3: Throw them in, cut them up, anesthesia. You don't need
Speaker 3: no sneak in anesthesia. Just cut him up, cut it out,
Speaker 3: throw him out the back door.
Speaker 2: Drive on